My apologies if I am spoiling the punchline of a later video. The Whirlwind ISO2 is not a mic splitter and is designed as line level isolation transformer, as such a mic should never be connected directly to it. I would fully expect it to alter the frequency response when connected in a mic level circuit. The Radial JS3 is marketed as a mic splitter. These two transformers are for two different use cases. It is on us as system designers and engineers to use the correct transformer for the job. Awesome test though. As you mentioned a little level drop is no big deal as long as the frequency response is unchanged.
Ooooh! This is a great subject. We have mic level and line leve audiol transformers. Do we need mic level for low level signals and line level for high level signals? We know that running line level into mic level transformers . Can overload/saturate them, but are there issues with mic level signals in line level transformers? If so, does that mean that quiet and low level line level signals sound bad in line level transformers? Or are mic and line level transformers pretty much the same and both equally good at mic level except line level transformera just allows higher level signals? Anyway, I may do a vid on that but in the mean time, for this series I will show that both mic level and line level transformers impact the sound of microphones.
@@DaveRat I believe it mainly is the impedance of the circuit elements that causes the problem you are seeing here. Even if you load a mic with multiple consoles with a hardwire split you will see frequency response problems due to the loading of the mic output. This will depend on the output impedance of the mic and the input impedance of the connected loads (whether transformers or electronically balanced inputs) I think you illustrated that at one point in your video with the blue line, but at one point (8:45) you said there was no difference between the hardwire split - two channels driven and with hardwire split - single channel driven (I may be mistaken on that). Later you showed that there was a low end difference with one channel driven as opposed to two (the blue line at 10:17). I am not trying to be pedantic or criticize in any way because these issues are in fact real. Interfacing analog gear is a huge problem. Many high end mic preamps for studio use have variable impedance so the engineer can experiment with "color". The level issue is another can of worms altogether.
@@DaveRatI suspect that it is not levels but is the interaction of the microphone output impedance or said another way, the internet impedance of the mic, transforms and board input.
Hi Dave, once again, you have presented a nice topic with good scientific method to provide answers to the questions... questions many times people aren't asking and should absolutely be asking. Your topics are great in that you tackle stuff that has always been taken as gospel. Transformers are one of those things. They come to the party like a burly super bouncer and throw out hum quick and without fuss, and a lot of times really solve a tough problem effortlessly. So they get the praise and hardly ever get questioned about that big S on their chest. But the real science behind this and your "sound coloring" type topics is that inserting ANYTHING(gadget, wire or otherwise) into a signal path - mic/line/headphone/speaker/nuclear level, will ultimately change the impedance characteristic and matching in that system to some degree, EVERYWHERE that particular gadget insertion is coupled. And transformers are no exception. Not only that, but sometimes, they may add a more incorrect impedance matching scenario for some applications when using split type transformers and can actually mirror bad impedance matching scenarios into unwanted places. I think it's easy to get the notion that somehow, magically you can put one microphone signal in and get three "identical" and split outputs without paying any price. But science is a heartless bitch that doesn't bargain and will always set the price. I can see where you're heading with this topic, and it'll be nice to see your part 2 and conclusions on just how big a price you have to pay at the end of the day, and is that price worth it for some applications. Thanks again for going through this and doing the footwork with the simple to understand testing that hopefully more techs will understand and remember. :)
I spent 6 years working as FOH/MON engineer in a small concert venue at The U of Wi. / Parkside, equipped with 56 built-in Jensen X-formers. I'm sure disappointed to think that they hammered the low frequencies all the time. It explains a lot watching your test. Thank-you, Dave. I'll stay tuned to find out more of what I don't know....
I have a Radial V12 Convertible splitter (56-channel, 3-way, with Jensens). I did this test a while back and found the differences through a transformer split and 150' snake to be +/- .8 db, mostly centered around 70 Hz. Good video, Dave. I do live recording and I've never had an issue or a complaint with the recorded tracks or from the broadcast truck.
The sound through the transformer vs the sound direct are near 8dentical with a slight attenuation as you tested. The issue is that the sound when the transformer is not connected vs with the transformer connect has much bigger differences and the differences 8mpact both the transformed and direct signal Transformers change the way the actual mic sounds
@@DaveRat Agreed. But the sound through the Jensen mic splitter transformer is pleasing and not at all bad. I would like to see the harmonic distortion levels through the transformer, both at unity and pushed a little. That would be good info.
@@DaveRat Also, I wonder what the impedance has to do with this too. I was always told to get the Jensens instead of the Lundahls because they were better at preserving the high end on long analog cable runs because of the impedance. Never tested it. I do love me some analog farm to table.
Hey Dave, I avoid transformers too. All I knew was it screwed with the tone of the mics. Now I see it and understand what I was hearing. Again, thanks for taking your time to do these tests. I've improved my skills across the board (pun intended) thanks to you! Keep it going brother!
OK, so this is inline with the impedance video i did a while back. A change in impedance will alter the lower end response of just about any microphone (more noticeable on dynamics). The high end isn't effected as much (if at all). Higher impedances directly connected to the mic resulted in better low end response. Lower impedance started to rob the bottom end a bit. We used the variable impedance cloudlifter product to be able to see what happens to the response as you increase/decrease the load. When you got to "dangerous" low impedance, you started losing signal strength as well. Im guessing that when you start to load the line down with splits and other transformers, you're changing the impedance the mic is seeing, resulting in a change. Would be interesting to see what happens if you have a higher impedance transformer on the same split.
Excellent video! Love your methodology when performing these demonstrations; you can learn a lot about how to conduct experiments, audio or not, from watching your videos.
Harmonic distortion is a measure of the total harmonic distortion but depending on the harmonics that are created as distortion the sound will be awesome or very bad - for the same THD! There's a video from Burning Amp with the guy from Averlab talking about it and showing some sample files with equal THD and very different sound quality. Thanks for the videos - excellent!!!!
I know the old analog splitters often had transformers on every channel. But these days if I'm using an ISO it's almost always going to be on a line level signal. For example feeding a green room speaker that's plugged into the wall. I'm curious if the transformer has the same amount of impact on a line level signal vs mic level.
quality video demonstration; a valuable look in to the difference between transparent and colored transformer design. I still prefer Whirlwind products. From what I can tell the whirlwind being the lowest will allow for the most depth of change per perception in the low end and for people that want more breakup sound coming through in the low end of their signal the Whirlwind should be the best. Most transparent Cinemag would then be least colored and therefore offer advantages too. Nothing is right or wrong here since they are transformers and the signal itself is not being manipulated as much as it appears though I'm sure there are those people that will jump to conclusions and want to think whirlwind is wrong, still my favorite. I also really like whirlwind cables.
11:52 of course it changes a bit the response of the mic. Consider that the mic is "watching" 2 different worlds. With the Xformer it's coil and it's internal xformer it get substantial inductive load (and complex, considering also the distributed capacitance inter-winding), very different "environment" from a direct connection to a transformerless preamp. However these values are very small. Di per se, if the xformer is connected to signal generator form one side, properly loaded, and the same to the other side going to analyzers, you should get the declared specs 😊
I get the declared specs through the transformers. But what good are having super accurate declared specs when the transformers alters the sound of the mic source itself in drastic ways that are 100 x more sloppy? Plus the transformers alter condenser mics and dynamic mics differently. And alter each brand and model of mic differently and each type of transformer induces different changes. So here you have this precise transformer spec and as soon as you use it on a mic it makes a huge change to the sound of mics that does not show up in any spec. All good as long as ya know that you won't know what will happen till you plug it in and listen and what you end up with is not just mic spec plus transformer spec.
@@DaveRat it makes sense because it’s impossible to test an Xformer on every single mic on Earth. If connected to TLM mics to one side and to electronically balanced pre to the other side, it should behave as declared. But when this is not the case, having a pletora of preamps and mics, it’s impossible to go through all.
@@Not-Only-Reaper-Tutorials yeah, so for me, I was surprised the difference were as drastic as they are and so divergent based on mic and transformer. We tend to assume that if you plug in a mic with a known response and sound into a console with a known sound and split with a transformer with a known and flat response, we will get those known sounds. The fact that adding the transformer alters not only the sound of the mic passing through it in ways not shown in the transformer spec, but also alters the sound of the mic sent to all other places that are not even passing through the transformer, is interesting and I believe most people are not aware of.
@@DaveRat exactly… there is not consistency into the sound. Each time a different result and ppl is convinced is something… but it’s something else. That’s why I do avoid transformers as much as possible, when they are interfaced with other transformers. The most sensitive mics, for this side FX, are the passive ribbons … they are dramatically change the tone based on to which transformer are connected to. That’s why I use active ones. And condensers: transformerless.
Yeah, as a gigging musician, my passive splitters (aka transformer) have been life-savers on numerous occasions and in the vast majority of those, the tone alteration was insignificant. However, a transformer is essentially just two electro-magnetically coupled coils, which will interact with all the resistors, capacitors, cable-capacitance/-inductance, transistors and op-amps connected to either side of it. The "isolation" technically only refers to the grounding-connection, not that the signal itself is isolated. The afformentioned occasions of significant alteration were in A) using a transformer between my interfaces headphone-out and wireless-gaming-headset-emitter, which resulted in a strong low-pass filter; and B) when splitting the direct electric guitar signal, but with a fuzz-face style pedal in either signal chain. The latter is really a consequence of the the fuzz-faces unorthodox way of loading the input, but it was an eye-opener for me, that a transformer is and will always be a part that interacts. Edit: PS: when using a fuzz-face, there is no possible way to split the direct guitar signal AND have the fuzz work correctly. There is a pedal called Lunar Module that supposedly still sounds and reacts like a fuzz-face, but without the loading, so theoretically, it should work with a splitter.
Hi - Thank You for all the videos and info..Apologies for being off topic - but would you please do a video showing how distribution amps are hooked up to all the amp racks and speakers? brd>distro amp(s)>crossover>power amps>speakers? I've done searches but never saw a video that showed how distro amps are actually used in arena/stadium PAs with all the amp racks and speakers.. Your time and knowledge are very much appreciated!
I just had to add iso transformers to my guitar rig to eliminate ground issues and crosstalk. It was an Axe FX(crosstalk between internal channels) and a Fryette Power Station not getting along. Interesting how the Radial stuff is closer to transparent so far.
@@frutekneobichni2123 not really, with the dynamic mic it starts rolling off at above 125hz. Also, the attenuation is pretty substantial at close to 5 or 6dbs on some frequencies..
Owning a mobile studio made a big fan of transformers. Many years ago, I found a seller with 40 Triiad-Utrad mil-spec transformers with surprising specs [+30dbm below 20hz flat to 30,000 with low distortion]. I think their new cost is $250-ish each. They sounded so transparent to me, I installed them as default in my truck’s hi-level IO. They were TT patch bypass-able but I never even bothered. If someone needed a feed or had a source, it went thru one of those transformers. I made 12 of them into durable handheld ‘dongles’ that can be used for self defense if needed. They are heavy, solid steel cans plus shielded windings. In 30 years of work, they’ve probably saved me a couple weeks 🤣. They are for my purposes, perfect. Very expensive, no excuses.
Interesting, although visually and to my ears the noise does not really change on the Radials. Given the behavior of coils (storing energy in magnetic fields), I'd be interested in phase changes as well, but given the nulling options, you're probably going to talk about that in the next videos. One more thing, do these transformer boxes normally have a method of transferring phantom power? I'd expect the simpler versions at least to block that (it's DC after all). Since you use a split, I guess that's what gives power to the Audix?
Yes, will cover in the next vids. As far as phantom, typically at least on connections direct and the other connections are through transformers. The big surprise for me is that we used to argue and decide who gets the better sounding direct feed and supplies phantom and who gets the transformer splits. What this shows is that as soon as there is a transformer added, the sound is changed for everyone including the direct split.
A totally misplaced request: Can you do a video on Unbalanced insert jacks interfacing Balanced Outboard? And the proper way to route those 1/4" insert jacks through a patchbay.
Was the graph showing a sum of channel 1 and 2 or just channel 1? If it was the sum my uneducated guess is that there is a slight phase shift leading to negative interference in the lows. But that would be irrelevant to me as I never sum two transformer isolated signals.
The graph is not showing the sum. Adding a transformer adds inductance altering the output of the mic. Just adding the transformer whether it is plugged into anything else or not, makes everything the mic is connected to sound different.
@Dave I am only doing small clubs. I run an IEM system where I split to the IEM and FOH. I use the cheap ART mic splitter. Question: at a small venue do I need to have a transformer isolated signal or should I just do hard wire split like a Seismic Audio splitter?
My experience has been that if you can get away without a transformer, the sound is better. If FOH and mons are all connected to the same power outlet box, you should be able to avoid transformers
my spidey senses says something with the impedance is changing which is causing some of that low end roll off? I'm not an expert, but yeah good to know this is a thing!
Yeah, the sound through the transformer is excellent but the inductance and resistance of the transformer alters the sound that the mic outputs. And on some mics it boosts lows, some it cuts lows, some it attenuates some or all freqs.
@@DaveRat wow! so things are not as simple as they may appear on the surface, or they are not as simple as we want them to be! haha great insight thank you sir
Every component that goes into an audio circuit will have it's effects on the signal path. Transistors, tubes, ICs, passive components ... all can have their advantages and disadvantages. Good audio transformers from companies like Jensen, Lundahl etc. that are wisely (!) used in a circuit will have an effect, but mostly by improving CMRR (Common Mode Rejection Ratio) and SNR (Signal to Noise Ratio). The frequency and phase linearity of good audio transformers plus their low THD make them suitable even for the highest quality designs. So will transformer based equipment sound worse? Only if it's a crappy design or by intention (e.g. to achieve a certain sound). The SM58, like most dynamic and ribbon microphones, is especially sensitive to impedance (Z) mismatches. Loading a dynamic or ribbon microphone with less than 10 times it's own impedance (e.g. 150 Ohms > 1500 Ohm at input) can drastically change the impulse response which is the main reason why the sound changes as well. So it's actually the users (or equipment designers) fault of mismatching impedances and never the fault of a good transformer. Using transformers is just another way of doing things - not better or worse.
And also, if the sound of your show is dialed in and you then add a transformer split to send the mics to somewhere else like a recording truck. The addition of the transformers will significantly change the sound of the mics and everything those mics are connected to, even if those sends don't go through the transformers. The transformers may make things better, may make things worse but either way, your show won't sound the same once they are added.
Cinemag and lundahl are fine transformer but they are not cheap . Impedance mismatch I can see looking forward to the results from you demo . Transformers loading of the mix deck is interesting .
yes. Inductance cuts bass and capacitance cuts treble. I built a 1-1 phantom-passing transformer box to tame the sound of my mics. I got a better recorder and none of that is useful. Guitar amplifiers get their sound from transformers. Phase shifts are also audible.
To me, it looks like you are not comparing between the two correct points in the chain. If I understand correctly, you are essentially testing what happens to the Y-split signal BEFORE the transformer when a transformer is connected on the other side of the split. However, shouldn't you be comparing the signal without any sort of split in the chain with the signal POST transformer? You wouldn't ever Y-split before using an active splitter (transformer), because the whole reason why active splitters exist is that Y-splitters perform poorly when they are hooked up to two inputs with different input impedances. To rephrase this: I am interested in a comparison between the sound without any transformer in the chain (also not on the other side of a Y-split!) and the way it sounds after the transformer, if we do indeed choose to use it. I am not seeing you compare those. 🙂
Adding the transformer changed all the sound of the chain. It changes the sound the mic puts out. Measuring the hardwire splits or after the transformer has the same or nearly identical sound. Removing the transformer changed the sound. There are 3 vids in the series which show more.
What you should be comparing is: Mic -------------------------- Mic pre --------------------- X and Mic ------------- JS3 -------- Mic pre ------------------- X \_______ mic pre ----------------- what you are comparing is: Mic -------------------------- Mic pre --------------------- X and Mic ----- passive Y-splitter ------- JS3 ---------- Mic pre --------- \________________ Mic pre --------- X But that's not how you would use the JS3 splitter with the transformer in practice! What you have demonstrated with this comparison is why passive Y-splitters are problematic (when their two outputs are connected to different impedance inputs), which is exactly why splitters with transformers were invented in the first place (I think!). I hope I'm not coming off as impolite here, really trying to understand this better.
Any transformer has a usable bandwidth. It is part of the physics of the device. Many common microphon4es contain a transformer for changing the impedance from the capsule voice coil. An example is the Shure SM58. This allows using a less delicate voice coil with fewer turns and heavier gauge wire. Transformers do not work at all on DC and as you approach DC in the lower audio spectrum, the phase shift and attenuation increases. At the upper limit of bandwidth, core eddy currents again impact attenuation. High frequency transformers such as found in a switch mode power supply use powdered iron in the core to reduce losses in higher frequency operation, but at the cost of less iron in the core resulting in loss of response in low frequencies. Any audio transformer is a compromise due to physics. This is the reason active DI boxes are made for keyboards and other extended range instruments. A passive DI is fine for instruments with magnetic pickups as they are already frequency limited by the physics of the magnetic pickup. Lessons leaned.. use magnetic DI for converting impedance of high impedance magnetic pickups. Use active DI for electronic wide band instruments such as a keyboard. This experiment shows the actual physics of phase shift of inductors and limited passband.
And also, mics sound one way and when using an iso transformer the mic sounds different on everything connected to the circuit including the direct out that isn't even going through the transformer
@@DaveRat Dynamic mics, as well as magnetic guitar pickups are affected by loading. The effect is the strongest in the lower frequencies. The additional load attenuates the lower frequencies more due to the properties of a transformer. To keep the mic properties unchanged, use an active DI on your dynamic microphones or if you use a passive DI, make up for the loss with the EQ. Even the Beta 58 has the roll off in the low end. Condenser microphones can have extended low end, which is why drum kits are often setup with dual mics with the inside mic a PZM condenser.
There's a flaw in your testing method. You are using a hardwired split with one side of the split going to a channel in the mixer. When you place a different "load" by way of putting a transformer on the second leg of the split you are of course going to alter the way the other leg of the hardwire split is going to act simply because its impedance is going to change in accordance with the changes in the second legs impedance changes. In a typical FOH\monitor split, or FOH\Recording split one leg of the split is hardwired through to one of the mixers but the other output of the split is transformer isolated (doesn't connect directly). There is no change in the impedance on the hardwired connection, and any changes in impedance on either leg don't affect the other line and shouldn't affect the mic frequency response except that transformers will typically color the sound and may dull transient response depending on the quality of the transformer.
Hmmm. We own about 20 or so splitters and toured as a sound engineer for almost 40 years doing events ranging from clubs to stadiums. Though there are many ways of splitting, the common ones tend to be Hardwire to 2 consoles Hardwire to one console and xformer to the 2nd console Hardwire to 2 consoles and xformer to the record truck Hardwire to one console and transformer with 2 secondaries, on to foh or mons and the other to rec truck Our 2 way concert splitters are mic input with 2 outs, 1 is a direct out and the other is a transformer out Our 3 way splits are direct out, transformer split out 1 and transformer split out 2 As I go through the videos I will show that purely adding the transformer to the circuit alter the sound of the mic and therefore everything connected to that mic. And that terminating the transformer 8nto a console channel slightly increases how much it alter the mic sound. And that different mics are impacted drastically differently and that different transformers have drastically different impacts.
@@DaveRat I always heard that an unbuffered split causes the gain to interact between the two sides. "gain fighting" is something I don't fully understand but I would guess that the effective impedance of each side of the hard split is affected by the gain used on each side.
that said, if FoH and monitor engineer are working together, once the level changes are done, there should be no more "gain fighting" and certainly no transformer coloration on a hard split! YMMV with op-amps!!?
Calling it a flaw might be a stretch. Dave is choosing a method to look at the problem and provide a relative measurement to compare to point out variations, and thus a valid measurement. There's many ways to connect up a measurement scenario to get at this particular topic of transformer coloring. In the case of a direct hardwire split, the coupling is directly wired yes, but anytime you piggyback something on that direct coupling, you do in fact change the impedance matching of that hardwire coupling and any load placed on a transformer split will effectively mirror back impedance changes to the primary side of the transformer and anything it's piggybacked onto, sometimes negligible, and sometimes massive.
@@DaveRat Well congratulations on being a sound engineer for almost 40 years and doing events ranging from clubs to stadiums. As a sound engineer with about 20 or so splitters, you know that splitters that use transformers typically have one output that is hardwired directly to an output. With 40 years of experience, you also know that splitters that use transformers connect to the same input as the hardwired input, but utilize transformers as a way of isolating the additional outputs. Now given that you have vast experience in stadiums you may use multiple inputs into your splitter but you probably don't use a hardwired split with another splitter on one leg of that hardwire split, As a sound engineer, you would realize putting a splitter, or even a transformer on one leg of a hardwired splitter would cause one leg of the hardwired splitter to have a different impedance, due to the added resistance of the transformer, compared to the other leg with no transformer. Putting a transformer on one leg of a hardwired splitter would cause the impedance of the other leg to vary (change) as the impedance changed with the load applied to the transformer. That is why you got the results you did, but that is not a real-world scenario as a sound engineer with 40 years of experience working events from clubs to stadiums would know. So the question is does having (a) transformer(s) in a splitter affect the hardwired leg of a splitter (or affect the output of the microphone on a hardwired leg of a splitter, and does having phantom power applied to the hardwired side of the splitter affect the transformed signal? I'm looking forward to your exciting conclusions!
Transformers have problems. Size. Weight. Vibration. Cost. Repairability. Other than that they are just fine. These days people do splits by converting to digital.
Strange no mention of the reason transformers are superior, the good one’s have far better common mode rejection than any solid state solution to balanced input. No great mystery the issues with dynamic microphones… sensitive to load impedance.
Also condenser mics are impacted as well. Transformers can be useful tools. And knowing the issues that the tools used to fix things can cause, can help one decide whether using the tool is worth the audio or financial cost
Interesting. I purposely use cheap gear to do demos so people can learn to recreate anything I do easily I have spent decades mixing some of the world's biggest bands doing some of the largest shows on the best gear money can buy. And there is a time and place for everything. No reason to use solid gold spoons to show how to eat soup.
My apologies if I am spoiling the punchline of a later video. The Whirlwind ISO2 is not a mic splitter and is designed as line level isolation transformer, as such a mic should never be connected directly to it. I would fully expect it to alter the frequency response when connected in a mic level circuit. The Radial JS3 is marketed as a mic splitter. These two transformers are for two different use cases. It is on us as system designers and engineers to use the correct transformer for the job. Awesome test though. As you mentioned a little level drop is no big deal as long as the frequency response is unchanged.
Ooooh! This is a great subject.
We have mic level and line leve audiol transformers. Do we need mic level for low level signals and line level for high level signals?
We know that running line level into mic level transformers . Can overload/saturate them, but are there issues with mic level signals in line level transformers?
If so, does that mean that quiet and low level line level signals sound bad in line level transformers?
Or are mic and line level transformers pretty much the same and both equally good at mic level except line level transformera just allows higher level signals?
Anyway, I may do a vid on that but in the mean time, for this series I will show that both mic level and line level transformers impact the sound of microphones.
@@DaveRat I believe it mainly is the impedance of the circuit elements that causes the problem you are seeing here. Even if you load a mic with multiple consoles with a hardwire split you will see frequency response problems due to the loading of the mic output. This will depend on the output impedance of the mic and the input impedance of the connected loads (whether transformers or electronically balanced inputs) I think you illustrated that at one point in your video with the blue line, but at one point (8:45) you said there was no difference between the hardwire split - two channels driven and with hardwire split - single channel driven (I may be mistaken on that). Later you showed that there was a low end difference with one channel driven as opposed to two (the blue line at 10:17). I am not trying to be pedantic or criticize in any way because these issues are in fact real. Interfacing analog gear is a huge problem. Many high end mic preamps for studio use have variable impedance so the engineer can experiment with "color". The level issue is another can of worms altogether.
@@DaveRat Please do that video!
@@DaveRatI suspect that it is not levels but is the interaction of the microphone output impedance or said another way, the internet impedance of the mic, transforms and board input.
Hi Dave, once again, you have presented a nice topic with good scientific method to provide answers to the questions... questions many times people aren't asking and should absolutely be asking. Your topics are great in that you tackle stuff that has always been taken as gospel. Transformers are one of those things. They come to the party like a burly super bouncer and throw out hum quick and without fuss, and a lot of times really solve a tough problem effortlessly. So they get the praise and hardly ever get questioned about that big S on their chest. But the real science behind this and your "sound coloring" type topics is that inserting ANYTHING(gadget, wire or otherwise) into a signal path - mic/line/headphone/speaker/nuclear level, will ultimately change the impedance characteristic and matching in that system to some degree, EVERYWHERE that particular gadget insertion is coupled. And transformers are no exception. Not only that, but sometimes, they may add a more incorrect impedance matching scenario for some applications when using split type transformers and can actually mirror bad impedance matching scenarios into unwanted places. I think it's easy to get the notion that somehow, magically you can put one microphone signal in and get three "identical" and split outputs without paying any price. But science is a heartless bitch that doesn't bargain and will always set the price. I can see where you're heading with this topic, and it'll be nice to see your part 2 and conclusions on just how big a price you have to pay at the end of the day, and is that price worth it for some applications.
Thanks again for going through this and doing the footwork with the simple to understand testing that hopefully more techs will understand and remember. :)
@14:49... 🤯 mind blown, definitely a change. Looking forward to your next video
Awesome, hope to release today
I spent 6 years working as FOH/MON engineer in a small concert venue at The U of Wi. / Parkside, equipped with 56 built-in Jensen X-formers. I'm sure disappointed to think that they hammered the low frequencies all the time. It explains a lot watching your test. Thank-you, Dave. I'll stay tuned to find out more of what I don't know....
I have a Radial V12 Convertible splitter (56-channel, 3-way, with Jensens). I did this test a while back and found the differences through a transformer split and 150' snake to be +/- .8 db, mostly centered around 70 Hz. Good video, Dave. I do live recording and I've never had an issue or a complaint with the recorded tracks or from the broadcast truck.
The sound through the transformer vs the sound direct are near 8dentical with a slight attenuation as you tested.
The issue is that the sound when the transformer is not connected vs with the transformer connect has much bigger differences and the differences 8mpact both the transformed and direct signal
Transformers change the way the actual mic sounds
@@DaveRat Agreed. But the sound through the Jensen mic splitter transformer is pleasing and not at all bad. I would like to see the harmonic distortion levels through the transformer, both at unity and pushed a little. That would be good info.
@@DaveRat Also, I wonder what the impedance has to do with this too. I was always told to get the Jensens instead of the Lundahls because they were better at preserving the high end on long analog cable runs because of the impedance. Never tested it. I do love me some analog farm to table.
Hey Dave, I avoid transformers too. All I knew was it screwed with the tone of the mics. Now I see it and understand what I was hearing.
Again, thanks for taking your time to do these tests. I've improved my skills across the board (pun intended) thanks to you!
Keep it going brother!
OK, so this is inline with the impedance video i did a while back. A change in impedance will alter the lower end response of just about any microphone (more noticeable on dynamics). The high end isn't effected as much (if at all). Higher impedances directly connected to the mic resulted in better low end response. Lower impedance started to rob the bottom end a bit. We used the variable impedance cloudlifter product to be able to see what happens to the response as you increase/decrease the load. When you got to "dangerous" low impedance, you started losing signal strength as well. Im guessing that when you start to load the line down with splits and other transformers, you're changing the impedance the mic is seeing, resulting in a change. Would be interesting to see what happens if you have a higher impedance transformer on the same split.
Excellent video! Love your methodology when performing these demonstrations; you can learn a lot about how to conduct experiments, audio or not, from watching your videos.
So cool thank you Wes!
Wow, Dave, this is so usefull! Thanks, buddy! Love these kind of tests! 🙂
🤙👍🤙
Harmonic distortion is a measure of the total harmonic distortion but depending on the harmonics that are created as distortion the sound will be awesome or very bad - for the same THD! There's a video from Burning Amp with the guy from Averlab talking about it and showing some sample files with equal THD and very different sound quality. Thanks for the videos - excellent!!!!
👍🤙👍
I know the old analog splitters often had transformers on every channel. But these days if I'm using an ISO it's almost always going to be on a line level signal. For example feeding a green room speaker that's plugged into the wall. I'm curious if the transformer has the same amount of impact on a line level signal vs mic level.
quality video demonstration; a valuable look in to the difference between transparent and colored transformer design. I still prefer Whirlwind products. From what I can tell the whirlwind being the lowest will allow for the most depth of change per perception in the low end and for people that want more breakup sound coming through in the low end of their signal the Whirlwind should be the best. Most transparent Cinemag would then be least colored and therefore offer advantages too. Nothing is right or wrong here since they are transformers and the signal itself is not being manipulated as much as it appears though I'm sure there are those people that will jump to conclusions and want to think whirlwind is wrong, still my favorite. I also really like whirlwind cables.
🤙👍🤙
11:52 of course it changes a bit the response of the mic. Consider that the mic is "watching" 2 different worlds. With the Xformer it's coil and it's internal xformer it get substantial inductive load (and complex, considering also the distributed capacitance inter-winding), very different "environment" from a direct connection to a transformerless preamp. However these values are very small.
Di per se, if the xformer is connected to signal generator form one side, properly loaded, and the same to the other side going to analyzers, you should get the declared specs 😊
I get the declared specs through the transformers. But what good are having super accurate declared specs when the transformers alters the sound of the mic source itself in drastic ways that are 100 x more sloppy?
Plus the transformers alter condenser mics and dynamic mics differently. And alter each brand and model of mic differently and each type of transformer induces different changes.
So here you have this precise transformer spec and as soon as you use it on a mic it makes a huge change to the sound of mics that does not show up in any spec.
All good as long as ya know that you won't know what will happen till you plug it in and listen and what you end up with is not just mic spec plus transformer spec.
@@DaveRat it makes sense because it’s impossible to test an Xformer on every single mic on Earth. If connected to TLM mics to one side and to electronically balanced pre to the other side, it should behave as declared. But when this is not the case, having a pletora of preamps and mics, it’s impossible to go through all.
@@Not-Only-Reaper-Tutorials yeah, so for me, I was surprised the difference were as drastic as they are and so divergent based on mic and transformer.
We tend to assume that if you plug in a mic with a known response and sound into a console with a known sound and split with a transformer with a known and flat response, we will get those known sounds.
The fact that adding the transformer alters not only the sound of the mic passing through it in ways not shown in the transformer spec, but also alters the sound of the mic sent to all other places that are not even passing through the transformer, is interesting and I believe most people are not aware of.
@@DaveRat exactly… there is not consistency into the sound. Each time a different result and ppl is convinced is something… but it’s something else. That’s why I do avoid transformers as much as possible, when they are interfaced with other transformers. The most sensitive mics, for this side FX, are the passive ribbons … they are dramatically change the tone based on to which transformer are connected to. That’s why I use active ones. And condensers: transformerless.
🤙👍🤙
Yeah, as a gigging musician, my passive splitters (aka transformer) have been life-savers on numerous occasions and in the vast majority of those, the tone alteration was insignificant.
However, a transformer is essentially just two electro-magnetically coupled coils, which will interact with all the resistors, capacitors, cable-capacitance/-inductance, transistors and op-amps connected to either side of it.
The "isolation" technically only refers to the grounding-connection, not that the signal itself is isolated.
The afformentioned occasions of significant alteration were in
A) using a transformer between my interfaces headphone-out and wireless-gaming-headset-emitter, which resulted in a strong low-pass filter; and
B) when splitting the direct electric guitar signal, but with a fuzz-face style pedal in either signal chain.
The latter is really a consequence of the the fuzz-faces unorthodox way of loading the input, but it was an eye-opener for me, that a transformer is and will always be a part that interacts.
Edit: PS: when using a fuzz-face, there is no possible way to split the direct guitar signal AND have the fuzz work correctly.
There is a pedal called Lunar Module that supposedly still sounds and reacts like a fuzz-face, but without the loading, so theoretically, it should work with a splitter.
THANKS DAVE
👍🔧🔧👍
Very interesting. I like your gear testing videos. 👍
Thank you!
Hi - Thank You for all the videos and info..Apologies for being off topic - but would you please do a video showing how distribution amps are hooked up to all the amp racks and speakers?
brd>distro amp(s)>crossover>power amps>speakers?
I've done searches but never saw a video that showed how distro amps are actually used in arena/stadium PAs with all the amp racks and speakers..
Your time and knowledge are very much appreciated!
I just had to add iso transformers to my guitar rig to eliminate ground issues and crosstalk. It was an Axe FX(crosstalk between internal channels) and a Fryette Power Station not getting along. Interesting how the Radial stuff is closer to transparent so far.
Yeah, wait till we try some other mics. things are a mess
@@DaveRat Yikes! Definitely staying tuned..
So I can visually interpret how a transformer will make a mic thin, thank you Dave.
And yet as you will see in future videos, transformers make some mics have more low end
But it noticable only in inaudiable frequencies in low end so no biggie
@@frutekneobichni2123 not really, with the dynamic mic it starts rolling off at above 125hz. Also, the attenuation is pretty substantial at close to 5 or 6dbs on some frequencies..
Owning a mobile studio made a big fan of transformers. Many years ago, I found a seller with 40 Triiad-Utrad mil-spec transformers with surprising specs [+30dbm below 20hz flat to 30,000 with low distortion]. I think their new cost is $250-ish each. They sounded so transparent to me, I installed them as default in my truck’s hi-level IO. They were TT patch bypass-able but I never even bothered. If someone needed a feed or had a source, it went thru one of those transformers. I made 12 of them into durable handheld ‘dongles’ that can be used for self defense if needed. They are heavy, solid steel cans plus shielded windings. In 30 years of work, they’ve probably saved me a couple weeks 🤣. They are for my purposes, perfect. Very expensive, no excuses.
interested in selling a couple of them nunchucks?
Nice video Dave, I hated the BETA58. Bought 4 when they came out and sold them after 4 shows. I am curious how the BETA58A fairs. Probably better.
Have you ever considered making a Rat Sound bluetooth stereo pair of your tiny Micro-wedge? USB-C rechargable?
I am working on little desktop monitor system. Little amprack and some wedges and a sub
@@DaveRat really cool
Great video!
Thanks! Michael!
Interesting, although visually and to my ears the noise does not really change on the Radials. Given the behavior of coils (storing energy in magnetic fields), I'd be interested in phase changes as well, but given the nulling options, you're probably going to talk about that in the next videos. One more thing, do these transformer boxes normally have a method of transferring phantom power? I'd expect the simpler versions at least to block that (it's DC after all). Since you use a split, I guess that's what gives power to the Audix?
Yes, will cover in the next vids.
As far as phantom, typically at least on connections direct and the other connections are through transformers.
The big surprise for me is that we used to argue and decide who gets the better sounding direct feed and supplies phantom and who gets the transformer splits.
What this shows is that as soon as there is a transformer added, the sound is changed for everyone including the direct split.
A totally misplaced request:
Can you do a video on Unbalanced insert jacks interfacing Balanced Outboard?
And the proper way to route those 1/4" insert jacks through a patchbay.
Was the graph showing a sum of channel 1 and 2 or just channel 1? If it was the sum my uneducated guess is that there is a slight phase shift leading to negative interference in the lows. But that would be irrelevant to me as I never sum two transformer isolated signals.
The graph is not showing the sum.
Adding a transformer adds inductance altering the output of the mic.
Just adding the transformer whether it is plugged into anything else or not, makes everything the mic is connected to sound different.
@Dave I am only doing small clubs. I run an IEM system where I split to the IEM and FOH. I use the cheap ART mic splitter. Question: at a small venue do I need to have a transformer isolated signal or should I just do hard wire split like a Seismic Audio splitter?
My experience has been that if you can get away without a transformer, the sound is better.
If FOH and mons are all connected to the same power outlet box, you should be able to avoid transformers
my spidey senses says something with the impedance is changing which is causing some of that low end roll off? I'm not an expert, but yeah good to know this is a thing!
Yeah, the sound through the transformer is excellent but the inductance and resistance of the transformer alters the sound that the mic outputs. And on some mics it boosts lows, some it cuts lows, some it attenuates some or all freqs.
@@DaveRat wow! so things are not as simple as they may appear on the surface, or they are not as simple as we want them to be! haha great insight thank you sir
@@DaveRat Are these all proper wound transformers, or are some using some sort of solid-state buffer?
Do we think that the JS3 was better then because at least it kept the frequency response consistent and only dropped level?
Every component that goes into an audio circuit will have it's effects on the signal path. Transistors, tubes, ICs, passive components ... all can have their advantages and disadvantages. Good audio transformers from companies like Jensen, Lundahl etc. that are wisely (!) used in a circuit will have an effect, but mostly by improving CMRR (Common Mode Rejection Ratio) and SNR (Signal to Noise Ratio). The frequency and phase linearity of good audio transformers plus their low THD make them suitable even for the highest quality designs. So will transformer based equipment sound worse? Only if it's a crappy design or by intention (e.g. to achieve a certain sound). The SM58, like most dynamic and ribbon microphones, is especially sensitive to impedance (Z) mismatches. Loading a dynamic or ribbon microphone with less than 10 times it's own impedance (e.g. 150 Ohms > 1500 Ohm at input) can drastically change the impulse response which is the main reason why the sound changes as well. So it's actually the users (or equipment designers) fault of mismatching impedances and never the fault of a good transformer. Using transformers is just another way of doing things - not better or worse.
And also, if the sound of your show is dialed in and you then add a transformer split to send the mics to somewhere else like a recording truck. The addition of the transformers will significantly change the sound of the mics and everything those mics are connected to, even if those sends don't go through the transformers.
The transformers may make things better, may make things worse but either way, your show won't sound the same once they are added.
Cinemag and lundahl are fine transformer but they are not cheap . Impedance mismatch I can see looking forward to the results from you demo . Transformers loading of the mix deck is interesting .
👍👍👍
Line input can use compressor and agin same as micphone use compressor and agin
not sure what that has to do with transformer impact on mic sound
Hai Dave, aku kembali dari Indonesia
yes. Inductance cuts bass and capacitance cuts treble. I built a 1-1 phantom-passing transformer box to tame the sound of my mics. I got a better recorder and none of that is useful.
Guitar amplifiers get their sound from transformers.
Phase shifts are also audible.
And on some mics adding the same transformers boosts the bass, as I will show in video 3
cool
👍
Thank god for digital splits :-)
Yes and yet there are loads of situations where people just throw a transformer in line and don't realize there is an impact.
To me, it looks like you are not comparing between the two correct points in the chain. If I understand correctly, you are essentially testing what happens to the Y-split signal BEFORE the transformer when a transformer is connected on the other side of the split. However, shouldn't you be comparing the signal without any sort of split in the chain with the signal POST transformer? You wouldn't ever Y-split before using an active splitter (transformer), because the whole reason why active splitters exist is that Y-splitters perform poorly when they are hooked up to two inputs with different input impedances.
To rephrase this: I am interested in a comparison between the sound without any transformer in the chain (also not on the other side of a Y-split!) and the way it sounds after the transformer, if we do indeed choose to use it. I am not seeing you compare those. 🙂
Adding the transformer changed all the sound of the chain. It changes the sound the mic puts out. Measuring the hardwire splits or after the transformer has the same or nearly identical sound. Removing the transformer changed the sound. There are 3 vids in the series which show more.
What you should be comparing is:
Mic -------------------------- Mic pre --------------------- X
and
Mic ------------- JS3 -------- Mic pre ------------------- X
\_______ mic pre -----------------
what you are comparing is:
Mic -------------------------- Mic pre --------------------- X
and
Mic ----- passive Y-splitter ------- JS3 ---------- Mic pre ---------
\________________ Mic pre --------- X
But that's not how you would use the JS3 splitter with the transformer in practice! What you have demonstrated with this comparison is why passive Y-splitters are problematic (when their two outputs are connected to different impedance inputs), which is exactly why splitters with transformers were invented in the first place (I think!).
I hope I'm not coming off as impolite here, really trying to understand this better.
You may have been right
Right!!
Any transformer has a usable bandwidth. It is part of the physics of the device. Many common microphon4es contain a transformer for changing the impedance from the capsule voice coil. An example is the Shure SM58. This allows using a less delicate voice coil with fewer turns and heavier gauge wire. Transformers do not work at all on DC and as you approach DC in the lower audio spectrum, the phase shift and attenuation increases. At the upper limit of bandwidth, core eddy currents again impact attenuation. High frequency transformers such as found in a switch mode power supply use powdered iron in the core to reduce losses in higher frequency operation, but at the cost of less iron in the core resulting in loss of response in low frequencies. Any audio transformer is a compromise due to physics. This is the reason active DI boxes are made for keyboards and other extended range instruments. A passive DI is fine for instruments with magnetic pickups as they are already frequency limited by the physics of the magnetic pickup. Lessons leaned.. use magnetic DI for converting impedance of high impedance magnetic pickups. Use active DI for electronic wide band instruments such as a keyboard. This experiment shows the actual physics of phase shift of inductors and limited passband.
And also, mics sound one way and when using an iso transformer the mic sounds different on everything connected to the circuit including the direct out that isn't even going through the transformer
@@DaveRat Dynamic mics, as well as magnetic guitar pickups are affected by loading. The effect is the strongest in the lower frequencies. The additional load attenuates the lower frequencies more due to the properties of a transformer. To keep the mic properties unchanged, use an active DI on your dynamic microphones or if you use a passive DI, make up for the loss with the EQ. Even the Beta 58 has the roll off in the low end. Condenser microphones can have extended low end, which is why drum kits are often setup with dual mics with the inside mic a PZM condenser.
There's a flaw in your testing method.
You are using a hardwired split with one side of the split going to a channel in the mixer.
When you place a different "load" by way of putting a transformer on the second leg of the split you are of course going to alter the way the other leg of the hardwire split is going to act simply because its impedance is going to change in accordance with the changes in the second legs impedance changes.
In a typical FOH\monitor split, or FOH\Recording split one leg of the split is hardwired through to one of the mixers but the other output of the split is transformer isolated (doesn't connect directly).
There is no change in the impedance on the hardwired connection, and any changes in impedance on either leg don't affect the other line and shouldn't affect the mic frequency response except that transformers will typically color the sound and may dull transient response depending on the quality of the transformer.
Hmmm. We own about 20 or so splitters and toured as a sound engineer for almost 40 years doing events ranging from clubs to stadiums.
Though there are many ways of splitting, the common ones tend to be
Hardwire to 2 consoles
Hardwire to one console and xformer to the 2nd console
Hardwire to 2 consoles and xformer to the record truck
Hardwire to one console and transformer with 2 secondaries, on to foh or mons and the other to rec truck
Our 2 way concert splitters are mic input with 2 outs, 1 is a direct out and the other is a transformer out
Our 3 way splits are direct out, transformer split out 1 and transformer split out 2
As I go through the videos I will show that purely adding the transformer to the circuit alter the sound of the mic and therefore everything connected to that mic. And that terminating the transformer 8nto a console channel slightly increases how much it alter the mic sound.
And that different mics are impacted drastically differently and that different transformers have drastically different impacts.
@@DaveRat I always heard that an unbuffered split causes the gain to interact between the two sides. "gain fighting" is something I don't fully understand but I would guess that the effective impedance of each side of the hard split is affected by the gain used on each side.
that said, if FoH and monitor engineer are working together, once the level changes are done, there should be no more "gain fighting" and certainly no transformer coloration on a hard split! YMMV with op-amps!!?
Calling it a flaw might be a stretch. Dave is choosing a method to look at the problem and provide a relative measurement to compare to point out variations, and thus a valid measurement. There's many ways to connect up a measurement scenario to get at this particular topic of transformer coloring. In the case of a direct hardwire split, the coupling is directly wired yes, but anytime you piggyback something on that direct coupling, you do in fact change the impedance matching of that hardwire coupling and any load placed on a transformer split will effectively mirror back impedance changes to the primary side of the transformer and anything it's piggybacked onto, sometimes negligible, and sometimes massive.
@@DaveRat Well congratulations on being a sound engineer for almost 40 years and doing events ranging from clubs to stadiums.
As a sound engineer with about 20 or so splitters, you know that splitters that use transformers typically have one output that is hardwired directly to an output.
With 40 years of experience, you also know that splitters that use transformers connect to the same input as the hardwired input, but utilize transformers as a way of isolating the additional outputs.
Now given that you have vast experience in stadiums you may use multiple inputs into your splitter but you probably don't use a hardwired split with another splitter on one leg of that hardwire split,
As a sound engineer, you would realize putting a splitter, or even a transformer on one leg of a hardwired splitter would cause one leg of the hardwired splitter to have a different impedance, due to the added resistance of the transformer, compared to the other leg with no transformer.
Putting a transformer on one leg of a hardwired splitter would cause the impedance of the other leg to vary (change) as the impedance changed with the load applied to the transformer.
That is why you got the results you did, but that is not a real-world scenario as a sound engineer with 40 years of experience working events from clubs to stadiums would know.
So the question is does having (a) transformer(s) in a splitter affect the hardwired leg of a splitter (or affect the output of the microphone on a hardwired leg of a splitter, and does having phantom power applied to the hardwired side of the splitter affect the transformed signal?
I'm looking forward to your exciting conclusions!
Transformers have problems. Size. Weight. Vibration. Cost. Repairability.
Other than that they are just fine. These days people do splits by converting to digital.
Transformers: more than meets the eye (😐sorry.)
⚡🤙⚡
All mixers not same it's different
True and that will add even another level of drastic changes.
No dont mess up as line in not same micphone input
The line transformers will work great or even better for mic level but are expensive and bigger. Mic transformers may overload with line level.
@@DaveRat thank you dave
Strange no mention of the reason transformers are superior, the good one’s have far better common mode rejection than any solid state solution to balanced input. No great mystery the issues with dynamic microphones… sensitive to load impedance.
Also condenser mics are impacted as well.
Transformers can be useful tools. And knowing the issues that the tools used to fix things can cause, can help one decide whether using the tool is worth the audio or financial cost
My take-away from this so far is that whirlwind is using inferior transformers
Yeah, does look that way.
The big surprise for me is that transformers change the sound of the mic that is not even going through the transformer.
That behringer gear made me stop watching this video
Interesting. I purposely use cheap gear to do demos so people can learn to recreate anything I do easily
I have spent decades mixing some of the world's biggest bands doing some of the largest shows on the best gear money can buy.
And there is a time and place for everything. No reason to use solid gold spoons to show how to eat soup.